Video game blogs and message boards have been debating the appropriateness of Kurt Cobain’s posthumous inclusion as a playable character in the recently released Guitar Hero 5. Some think it’s a welcome tribute, others find it a bit creepy if not outright distasteful.

But what does Cobain’s widow Courtney Love think? Well, one needs look no further than her Twitter account:

For the record this Guitar Hero [expletive] is breach of contract on a Bullys part and there will be a proper addressing of this and retraction. WE are going to sue the [expletive] out of Activision we being the Trust the Estate the LLC the various LLCs Cobain Enterprises.

While Love’s main gripe seems to be the appearance of Cobain’s character model and a feature that allows it to perform other artist’s songs, Activision Vice President Tim Riley told The Guardian that she was very cooperative in the creation of the game:

Courtney supplied us with photos and videos. She picked the wardrobe and hairstyle, which turned out to be the 'Teen Spirit' look, then we went back and forth over changes – some subtle, some not so subtle.

Love, for her part, doesn’t seem to agree:

Activision is fulllo f sh*t... i never intended to APPROVE this sh*t, they are doing a recall you can be sure of that… wait til you see what my lovely lawyer has cooked up, i never ever signed off on this.

Meanwhile, the Associated Press reports that surviving Nirvana members Krist Novoselic and Dave Grohl are also unhappy with the use of Cobain’s likeness:

While we were aware of Kurt's image being used with two Nirvana songs, we didn't know players have the ability to unlock the character. This feature allows the character to be used with any kind of song the player wants. We urge Activision to do the right thing in 're-locking' Kurt's character so that this won't continue in the future.

Activision defended itself in a statement released Thursday, saying that it “secured the necessary licensing rights from the Cobain estate in a written agreement signed by Courtney Love to use Kurt Cobain’s likeness as a fully playable character in Guitar Hero 5.”

Guys, if Activision got the necessary mechanical licenses to use the songs, and then got the permission from the estate to use the likeness and image of Cobain, then Activision is in the clear. No amount of attorney b.s. (no offense to attorneys) can change the fact that (it looks like) Activision is solid on this one.

Courtney Love controls Kurt's estate. On behalf of her and her daughter. She has been very tough in allowing his image, name, etc. to be used in anything. Even though her personal life has been a train wreck, she has been praised many times for her handling of the estate.

Something sounds fishy here. There might have been either a misunderstanding, or someone screwed up. Activision might have believed they could take advantage of her. Or she might have screwed up. We'll find out when it goes to court.

Yes, I am a liberal. I also believe in a strong military, less government, and the right to bear arms. ~ Me Calling an illegal alien an undocumented worker is like calling a crack dealer an unlicensed pharmacist. ~ Me

Yes, I am a liberal. I also believe in a strong military, less government, and the right to bear arms.

Which is why I find the knee-jerk reactionaries who leap to accusations of "greedy bitch" typical of the knee-jerk reactions which are often made here. Putting aside the fact that if Courtney Love sat on her ass for the rest of her life and didn't lift a finger, she'd probably be well-taken care of by the money which continues to roll into the Cobain estate and is therefore probably not too hard up for money and therefore doesn't have much need to extort a dollar outta Activision, no one pauses for a minute to consider the possibility that she's more interested in protecting her husband's image and memory than she is in making a buck.

Kurt would probably be pissed off at both sides over this to be honest, commericialism and greed were what pushed him into depression in the first place, and it didn't really matter what side of the divide it was on.

I saw a screenshot showing cobain in GH5 and my immediate reaction was one of anger that they would pimp the likness of a deadman out to sell video games.

I'm not going to ding Courtney Love for using her husband's songs and memory for monetary gain. She was a passable artist before cobain and can easily make her way in life without him. I certianly think that if Kurt can help to provide for his child in some way and maybe aid other people through grants or LLC's then go for it but for some reason it still irks me.

If she honestly thought that activision was going to limit kurt to his own material and signed the stuff in good faith with that proviso then she's got every right to sue the pants off of them.

I don't really have any desire to play as Kurt, ever, it's still too creepy.

Too bad Kurt didn't bother to stick around for that daughter...he would've been able to provide plenty for her had he not chosen the easy way out and ABANDONED her while she was a toddler by taking the easy way out instead of manning up and being a father.

I honestly don't get the hero worship of this guy. He was a d-bag who ran away from a daughter who needed his love. Eff him.

"You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

"You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

And I think that's Love's point and what a lot of people here just aren't understanding. She signed up for "X" and ended up getting "Y." If that's true, then she's every right to be pissed. And every right to sue.

And you seriously believe that Courtney Love sat her own ass down at the conference table completely alone and didn't use a team of $1000-an-hour attorneys to negotiate the license agreement on her behalf?

So instead of simply going "Hey ,they remembered him ,sweet" they're going "Bawwww, he's signin songs we didn;'t make" except for Courtney there who is looking to cash in on it.

I['m just happy Cobain is well remembered. And hey, in Guitar Hero 3 Slash and Tom Morello were i nthe game and were able ot play songs they never helped with, Bret Michaels was even in it and I doubt he'd have thrown a shitfit if he was an unlockable vocalist. I mean, if it has a character maker I won't doubt that people would just make him anyway.

There's a difference between saying "I intend to approve the use of Kurt's likeness performing his own material" and "I intend to approve the use of Kurt's likeness performing the material of others." The two are not the same. And it's very possible that she would have been unaware of the fact of the latter until after the game was unveiled.

Honestly, I disagree. I see absolutely no difference in the importance of whether he plays in his songs or any song. If I was a famous person, I'd be honored just to have my likeness in a game, and it'd be pretty stupid to make it so I was only used during my songs. It's not like Activision is making it so you can't use him during his songs, he's just allowing players to use him during any song. Why Courtney is bitching about this is beyond me.

-If an apple a day keeps the doctor away....what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

-Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

You know, I wasn't planning on getting GH5, due to shitty song selection, among other things.. But now, I might see if I can scrounge the money together just because I think Courtney Love is a greedy whore. Fuck them, they have plenty of money. (Not that Activision DOESN'T, but they aren't the ones threatening to sue.)

I'm no laywer, but does Activision even need permission to use Cobain's likeness for an avatar? To my understanding, the likenesses of public figures such as entertainers and politicians are public domain. How do you copyright a face?

No need to copyright. A person's likeness is recognized at common law as being their property, and theirs alone, to exploit as they choose. It's not in the public domain. Certainly not during their lifetime. And probably not for a long, long time after their death.

I'm pretty sure the law is set up so that reasonably well-known public figures DO NOT have a right to their likeness. I doubt the writers of political cartoons are out seeking the permission of presidents and congressmen all the time.

I'm pretty sure that you're as wrong as wrong can be. Political cartoons are usually satire and/or parody, both of which fall under the "fair use" exemption.

And think about what you're saying for a second. If Kurt Cobain, as a well-know public figure, had no rights in his own likeness as you suggest, then why would Activision have sought a license agreement in the first place? They'd have simply gone ahead and used his likeness without seeking anyone's permission because, technically, there'd be no need to seek permission.

OK I can agree with their point of view here. If they wanted to make him a playable character they should of kept him with his Nirvana songs and not put him to sing others. But Courtney's BS is beyond stupid. Besides I find it funny that she is still trying to milk her late-husband's legacy no matter how small it was.

Activision is fulllo f sh*t... i never intended to APPROVE this sh*t, they are doing a recall you can be sure of that… wait til you see what my lovely lawyer has cooked up, i never ever signed off on this.

If merely having a person's signature on an agreement was summarily and entirely dispositive of a dispute between the parties, then the expenditure of countless hours of court time and resources spent resolving contractual disputes could and would have been avoided. And there'd be no need for the entirely confusing and difficult to navigate "parole evidence rule."

Seems to me that Courtney Love is trying to extort more money from Activision. Apparently she signed a contract granting Activision to right to use Cobain anyway they saw fit in the game, so she has no case.

I don't see the problem here. If Activision has a signed document, then that's the end of it. Unless Love's attorneys intend to prove that she was high at the time of signing, which doesn't sound like it would be good for her.

I'm guessing she needed a fix and some quick cash from Activision was what she needed. Then when she sobered up she didn't remember signing any rather legally binding documents. And I don't think "well I was seriously fucked up" will hold up in court.

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.

ZippyDSMlee: .....win8 hates any left over hidden install partitions from other version of windows....only waste 5 hours finding that out...its ahrder than you think keeping up with 4 or 5 HDDS......03/03/2015 - 4:44am

Matthew Wilson: I am going to pax east, any games you guys want me to check out?03/02/2015 - 11:23pm

ZippyDSMlee: No one remembers the days of Cinemagic and Cynergy eh? :P, meh even MGS is getting to film like....03/02/2015 - 8:44pm

MechaTama31: I was about to get all defensive about liking Metal Gear Solid, but then I saw that he was talking about "cinematic" as a euphemism for "crappy framerate".03/02/2015 - 8:29pm

prh99: Just replace cinematic with the appropriate synonym for poo and you'll have gist of any press release.03/02/2015 - 5:34pm

Monte: Though from a business side, i would agree with the article. While it would be smarter for developers to slow down, you can't expect EA, Activision or ubisoft to do something like that. Nintnedo's gotta get the third party back.02/28/2015 - 4:36pm

Monte: Though it does also help that nintendo's more colorful style is a lot less reliant on graphics than more realistic games. Wind Waker is over 10 years old and still looks good for its age.02/28/2015 - 4:33pm

Monte: With the Wii, nintnedo had the right idea. Hold back on shiny graphics and focus on the gameplay experience. Unfortunatly everyone else keeps pushing for newer graphics and it matters less and less each generation. I can barely notice the difference02/28/2015 - 4:29pm

Monte: ON third party developers; i kinda think they should slow down to nintendo's pace. They bemoan the rising costs of AAA gaming, but then constantly push for the best graphics which is makes up a lot of those costs. Be easier to afford if they held back02/28/2015 - 4:27pm

Matthew Wilson: http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2015/02/28/the-world-is-nintendos-if-only-theyd-take-it/ I think this is a interesting op-ed, but yeah it kind of is stating the obvious.02/28/2015 - 2:52pm